For 22 years, Malaysia’s political
and economic fortunes were determined by the authoritarian and
tough-minded Dr Mahathir Mohamad.
When he stepped down as prime minister and president of the ruling
United Malay National Organisation (UMNO) exactly three years ago
today, he had been dubbed “Father of Modernisation” and was widely
admired by Malaysians for his outspoken criticism of western mores
and attitudes.
A succession of Australian prime ministers had angry exchanges
with Dr M, as many Malaysians know him.
Bob Hawke was among the first to get bilateral relations off on a
wrong footing when he infuriated Dr Mahathir by describing as
“barbaric” Malaysia’s hanging of two convicted Australian drug
addicts.
More famously Paul Keating brought relations to a low by
describing Dr M as “recalcitrant” after he had refused to attend
the first APEC Summit in Seattle in the United States.
One Malay language newspaper picked its best equivalent term as
kurang ajar, which translates into a highly derogatory equivalent
of “ill educated and ill mannered”, infuriating many Malaysians at
the time.
Australia’s leadership was relieved when Dr Mahathir made way for
his long-standing deputy, Abdullah Badawi, known to be friendlier
towards Australia.
As a former Malaysian prime minister, the 82-year-old Dr Mahathir
has turned his acerbic tongue on his anointed successor, publicly
stating that he had made a wrong choice.
The affable and mild-mannered Abdullah has tried hard not to get
caught up in a war-of-words but a recent meeting between them has
failed to achieve a peaceful outcome.
In Dr Mahathir’s eyes, Abdullah has been failing the nation
because he is not an adherent to his predecessor’s penchant for
grandiose projects such as the troubled Malaysian-made Proton car,
the country’s fibre optic information technology backbone and the
highly successful Petronas Twin Towers that for a brief period,
was the world’s tallest building.
Most of all, he is annoyed that Malaysia’s fifth prime minister
has refused to complete a “scenic” bridge linking the southern
state of Johore to neighbouring Singapore.
Dr M has also accused his successor of closing his eyes to
nepotism involving Abdullah’s son-in-law Khairy Jamaluddin.
Following the peace meeting, Dr Mahathir last weekend issued an
open letter to “the citizens of Malaysia” which he signed as
“Malaysian citizen and commoner”.
Dr Mahathir does not hold back, accusing his successor of creating
a police state with “action taken against anyone who criticises
the prime minister” and adding that “a climate of fear has
enveloped this country”.
“The current prime minister cannot at all be commented upon,
criticised or advised. He is almost a saint, who is free from any
human weaknesses or wrongs.
“Because of my statement that I would continue criticising if
something that is not good for the religion, race and country is
done by the prime minister, all sorts of condemnations and insults
are thrown by these hatchet men and the mainstream media towards
me.”
Ironically, similar criticisms could have been levelled during Dr
Mahathir’s term (1981 to 2003) when he faced two unsuccessful
challenges from previously close associates within the ruling UMNO.
Dr Mahathir always kept a tight rein on the Malaysian media and,
at one stage, shut down the popular Star newspaper, owned by
UMNO’s Chinese political affiliate, the Malaysian Chinese
Association. A Chinese and Malay language newspaper were also
simultaneously shut down.
The former Malaysian prime minister’s complex psychological
make-up appears to have impeded him from recognising the
tremendous progress made by three prime ministers that preceded
him and the likelihood this trend will persist.
If Dr Mahathir had come on the Malaysian scene any sooner, it is
unlikely the economy would be as sound as it is today since it
might not have been able to withstand the impacts of huge
loss-makers such as the government-funded Pewaja steel complex and
the likely failure of Proton if it is not able to win a foreign
manufacturing ally.
In a sense, Abdullah is picking up some of the pieces, having made
a start at turning around massive losses at Malaysia Airlines and
by indirectly forcing Proton to face up to the impending
competition from within the region and elsewhere.
Another of Dr M’s “think big” projects that is a total shambles is
his plan for a multi-billion dollar hydroelectric scheme in
Sarawak state on Borneo island, the Bakun project, where millions
of hectares of forest have been wiped out for a dam that the
government now admits cannot viably provide electricity to
Peninsula Malaysia.
The fact that Malaysia – which turns 50 on Aug 31 next year – is
one of the developing world’s greatest economic success stories
owes itself to steady economic progress since independence in 1957
with the first economic recession only occurring in the mid-80s
during Dr M’s period in office. Another such event occurred during
the 1997-98 Asian economic crisis.
Malaysia’s first and possibly greatest economic success story was
provided by its response to the sectarian Biafran War (1967-70)
when Malaysia took over from conflict-ridden Nigeria as the
world’s biggest palm oil industry producer.
Since its former British colonial days, it had been the world’s
biggest producer of natural rubber and tin, but palm oil suggested
to the national psyche that the country could take on immense
challenges and succeed.
At the heart of this success was a rapid rural transformation
engineered by the founding prime minister Tunku Abdul Rahman and
his development-oriented deputy and successor, Tun Abdul Razak.
Tun Razak was fairly austere, highly disciplined and somewhat
severe-looking, in sharp contrast to the happy-go-lucky and
aristocratic Tunku.
Unlike the “think big” goals of Dr Mahathir, Tun Razak worked on
simple goals where the long term impacts were just as dramatic.
When the late Tun visited small remote villages, he admonished
bureaucrats: “I do not mind if you make mistakes just as long as
the job gets done.”
Under his efforts, Malaysia turned massive forest areas into vast
rural development enclaves that the World Bank applauded as the
best in the world even though capital intensity was high.
Under these integrated schemes, each family owned a plot of rubber
or oil palm and grew crops for their own use, while availing
themselves to education, health and
other government-built facilities. Eventually they had to repay
the government.
Malaysia’s role as a large producer of semi-conductors began in
the late 1960s but it was during Dr Mahathir’s term that this and
other related sectors enabled industry to overtake agriculture as
the biggest contributor to gross domestic product.
The combative nature of Dr Mahathir was present even when he was
aspiring for leadership of the Malay ruling party.
His maverick streak first showed itself in 1969 when he attacked
the then prime minister, the Tunku, in an “open letter”, of being
the cause of the nation’s worst ever racial riots in May that
year.
He blamed the Tunku’s closeness to Chinese business leaders and
concessions granted to the Chinese community rather than the
turmoil caused by a highly ethnically divisive national election
campaign and outcome.
As a result, Dr Mahathir was expelled from UMNO but began a rapid
rise to the top after Tun Razak appointed him a senator in 1973.
Ironically, he now finds himself in a position to take on another
prime minister – one he anointed and now denounces.
This time, he may find himself a tougher opponent in Abdullah,
who, of late, appears to show some impatience against the sniping
from his predecessor.
In fact, after their recent private meeting, Abdullah has come out
making counter-charges.
No end is in sight to this confrontation and the sparks will
continue to fly in Malaysian politics.